Looking at 9/11 with actual science

[WWIIIDefender]

Debunking 9/11 Conspiracy Theories and Controlled Demolition - World Trade Center 7

That video doesn't show a hole, it looks like a hole from the black, but when they zoom in you can see its not a hole and just fires with broken out windows and and discolored concrete. But lets say there was a 20 story chunk missing, would that make the building free fall into itself. No it would topple over. Lets say every floor was burning all day with a raging fire, would that make it free fall into itself. well it may infact make it fall into itself but not at free fall. That only occures when the path is blown out of the way.

 

[Eddie]

That video doesn't show a hole, it looks like a hole from the black, but when they zoom in you can see its not a hole and just fires with broken out windows and and discolored concrete. But lets say there was a 20 story chunk missing, would that make the building free fall into itself. No it would topple over. Lets say every floor was burning all day with a raging fire, would that make it free fall into itself. well it may infact make it fall into itself but not at free fall. That only occures when the path is blown out of the way.

Then what is the point? WTC7 was evacuated two hours before it collapsed; what purpose would a controlled demolition serve?

 

[rhino]

ARGH!!! I CAN'T TAKE IT!

 

[WWIIIDefender]

Then what is the point? WTC7 was evacuated two hours before it collapsed; what purpose would a controlled demolition serve?

I don't know thats why I would like another investigation into it. SEC was investigation goldmen sachs at the time and there office was in WTC7 maybe they had indicments ready who knows. If the building was brought down like silverstien said then thats a whole different ball game, and we got another golf of tonkin on our hands.

 

[kedie]

the body part thing I agree with blackhawk on.

but Blackhawk, can you please give us examples of other "textbook pancake collapse"'es of steel buildings due to fire or structural damage?

i would like to see them.

Building 7 was not hit by a plane. No big chunk fell on it It was a steal frame and fell at free fall spead. Even NIST admits it fell at free fall spead. How does a steal building fall at free fall in a pankake theory. It doesn't

Neither WTC7 or the towers used traditional steel I beam frame construction. The towers used a "tube within a tube" construction. There was a steel and concrete core that contained the elevator shafts and stairwells. The outer "skin" provided the other structural component. The core and outer walls were connected by lightweight steel bar joists. This allowed for a totally open floor with no columns. There was not a steel skeleton in either of the towers.

WTC7 also did not use a traditional I beam skeleton. It had three massive transfer trusses to allow for large open lobbies on multiple floors. When a truss fails it does so in dramatic fashion.

 

[WWIIIDefender]

Building 7 Demolition

 

[WWIIIDefender]

funny how the BBC reported the collapse of the WTC7 building prior to it collapsing.
YouTube - BBC Reports Collapse of WTC Building 7 Early-- TWICE

 

[dross]

Okay, now I'm convinced.

Could we put the people in government who pulled this off in charge of everything else? They are clearly the most competent people who have ever worked in government in the history of the world.

 

[Blackhawk2001]

Building 7 Demolition

What part of "these types of structures were not put together the same as the relevant WTC buildings" do you not understand?

 

[public servant]

This is the most interesting I have ever seen.

 

[WWIIIDefender]

What part of "these types of structures were not put together the same as the relevant WTC buildings" do you not understand?

Yes they were built to withstand plane attacks.

TRR-May14-07
WTC Core Animation

 

[Blackhawk2001]

funny how the BBC reported the collapse of the WTC7 building prior to it collapsing.
YouTube - BBC Reports Collapse of WTC Building 7 Early-- TWICE

Once again, I can't access the video. Are we basing this claim on a time hack displayed on a video screen or what? We do realize that London is 5 hours ahead of us, right?

 

[WWIIIDefender]

Once again, I can't access the video. Are we basing this claim on a time hack displayed on a video screen or what? We do realize that London is 5 hours ahead of us, right?

No you can clearly see thier new york correspondent reporting about the colapse of WTC7 only its right behind her the whole time. Yes I am aware of the time difference.

The BBC aslo ran an apology for the mistake claiming that it was a very confusing day.

 

[Eddie]

No you can clearly see thier new york correspondent reporting about the colapse of WTC7 only its right behind her the whole time. Yes I am aware of the time difference.

The BBC aslo ran an apology for the mistake claiming that it was a very confusing day.

But what does it prove? It appears that a reporter made a mistake and the reporter apologized for making a mistake. Are you suggesting that the BBC was in on the conspiracy as well except that they botched their job and reported that the building had fallen too soon? That doesn't seem to fit in with the extremely competent group of conspirators armed with new secret thermite technology and delivering precisely controlled detonations. Why would the conspirators need a dupe reporter? Lots of regular reporters were sure to report that a building fell down.

 

[r3126]

BEING THE FOOL THAT I AM, I posted this in the wrong thread - the parody of this one. Now after a day and after enduring endless jabs for the wrong reply, I want to get IBTL.

A long video - just several minutes under two hours to watch. I have never been a conspiracy follower but, this made me pause and think.

I could buy the premise in a heartbeat if I could get past the issue of the numbers of people who would have to be complicit in the planning, preparation and execution of the task, the amount of time necessary to perform said tasks and the coordination necessary with the jihadists flying the airplanes.

There are not a lot of people with the experience and skill to design the blast patterns, place the charges and coordinate the execution and they are not found in the military and government sectors - let alone in the secret portions of those sectors. Further, keeping the entire thing secret not only in the planning, preparation and execution phases but in the ensuing 9 years is, in my estimation beyond belief. There are just too many good, God fearing people out there who, again in my estimation, could not keep such a monsterous, catastrophic and tragic event a complete and total secret.

I am now more undecided than I ever was but still refuse to put on my tinfoil hat. The film shots of the collapsing buildings made it evident to me, that internal fire and heat could not produce the type of collapse that was evident...

 

[dross]

The BBC aslo ran an apology for the mistake claiming that it was a very confusing day.

Well, that's a flimsy excuse. I don't know of anyone who was confused on 911.

 

[E5RANGER375]

well i say we use a building in the middle east and fly a plane into it and run an official test so we can put this to rest

 

[Eddie]

BEING THE FOOL THAT I AM, I posted this in the wrong thread - the parody of this one. Now after a day and after enduring endless jabs for the wrong reply, I want to get IBTL.

A long video - just several minutes under two hours to watch. I have never been a conspiracy follower but, this made me pause and think.

I could buy the premise in a heartbeat if I could get past the issue of the numbers of people who would have to be complicit in the planning, preparation and execution of the task, the amount of time necessary to perform said tasks and the coordination necessary with the jihadists flying the airplanes.

There are not a lot of people with the experience and skill to design the blast patterns, place the charges and coordinate the execution and they are not found in the military and government sectors - let alone in the secret portions of those sectors. Further, keeping the entire thing secret not only in the planning, preparation and execution phases but in the ensuing 9 years is, in my estimation beyond belief. There are just too many good, God fearing people out there who, again in my estimation, could not keep such a monsterous, catastrophic and tragic event a complete and total secret.

I am now more undecided than I ever was but still refuse to put on my tinfoil hat. The film shots of the collapsing buildings made it evident to me, that internal fire and heat could not produce the type of collapse that was evident...

But think about it this way; we are constantly trying to come up with scientific explanations for everything and finding out later on that our understanding was imperfect. The Titanic was unsinkable. The Tacoma Narrows bridge was built properly. Things do fail in spectacular ways when subjected to unexpected stresses.

The obvious explaination is that the buildings fell down because airplanes crashed into them. I am open to discussion of other theories, but so far none have made sense.

 

[WWIIIDefender]

But what does it prove? It appears that a reporter made a mistake and the reporter apologized for making a mistake. Are you suggesting that the BBC was in on the conspiracy as well except that they botched their job and reported that the building had fallen too soon? That doesn't seem to fit in with the extremely competent group of conspirators armed with new secret thermite technology and delivering precisely controlled detonations. Why would the conspirators need a dupe reporter? Lots of regular reporters were sure to report that a building fell down.

Newspapers and news agencies get most of there news fed to them by the government. Thats why the stories in the paper coincide with what you see on tv also the different agencies usually all cover the same stuff. They got the story early and ran with it. Without even looking behind them. How would they have that story. Being sorry doesn't make them psychic.

 

[WWIIIDefender]

But think about it this way; we are constantly trying to come up with scientific explanations for everything and finding out later on that our understanding was imperfect. The Titanic was unsinkable. The Tacoma Narrows bridge was built properly. Things do fail in spectacular ways when subjected to unexpected stresses.

The obvious explaination is that the buildings fell down because airplanes crashed into them. I am open to discussion of other theories, but so far none have made sense.

I understand your theory on the towers it makes sense to a lot of people, but what about building 7